Audi Q2 — MOT statistics 2024

The Audi Q2 failed 9.68% of 73,559 first MOT attempts in 2024 ("first-time", excluding retests). Adjusted for the age of the fleet, its initial-failure ratio is 62.4 (100 = expected for its age profile). This car fails its MOT about 38% less often than expected for its age.

Age-adjusted peer: Volkswagen T-Roc (index 62.4) — the two published results are 0.0 index points apart.

Audi Q2 common problems: what actually fails the MOT

Lamps, reflectors and electrical equipment are well below the reference at 1.0 per 100 tests, against 3.2 per 100 tests across UK vehicles of the same ages.

higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests

family vs national — matched to UK vehicles of the same ages — top component groups, per 100 tests. Legend: This family · National avg. Combined labels: family / national average. A gap here reflects how these vehicles are driven, used and maintained as well as how they were built — an MOT defect is a test outcome, not a breakdown.

Named defects ranked by how much more often they appear than the national average — not by raw rate.

Audi Q2 MOT advisories: what gets flagged

Tyres are highest at 44.1 per 100 tests; Emissions & leaks are lowest at 0.2 per 100 tests — the gap is 43.9 per 100 tests.

higher bar = flagged more oftenadvisory items per 100 initial tests

Advisories are wear the tester noted but didn't fail — what will need money soon.

Tyres, brakes and suspension: Audi Q2 against cars of the same age

Failing items per 100 initial tests, 2019-2024. The comparison group is every petrol or diesel car tested at the same age, so weight and drivetrain show up rather than fleet age.

If a car like this fails, does it fail again?

A failure rate does not say whether a failure is a one-off or the start of something. This follows the same vehicles into their next ordinary MOT a year later — retests after a repair are excluded, because they follow a failure by definition. 2019-2024.

A failed test raises next year's chance of failing again by 5.1 percentage points. The failure most likely to come back is noise, emissions and leaks — 17.0% of those vehicles fail again next year. Some of this is the vehicle and some is the owner: a car that was let go once tends to be let go again. One caveat: a car that fails may be sold or scrapped rather than tested again, so these figures describe the vehicles that came back.

Adjusted for how much these are actually driven

The headline index adjusts for the fleet's age. Wear, though, follows mileage: a three-year-old taxi and a three-year-old garage queen sit in the same age band. These two rows compare every car with vehicles of the same age, and then with vehicles of the same age and the same annual mileage, 2019-2024, on 220,713 tests. Both stand on the six-year corpus so they are measured on identical data — compare them with each other, not with the headline index above, which is measured on 2024 alone.

Mileage changes little here (+2.9 points): this fleet is driven about as much as the vehicles it is compared with. One limit to keep in mind: mileage is partly a result of how often a car breaks down — one that spends weeks in the workshop covers fewer miles — so the mileage-matched figure can understate a real weakness. Tests with no usable odometer reading are left out of it.

How the Audi Q2 compares with cars of its own age and size

Not against the whole fleet — against cars of the same size class tested at the same age, 2019-2024.

Raw first-time failure rates within each age, so fleet age cannot flatter either side. A positive difference means this model fails more often than its own class at that age.

How does the Audi Q2 perform as it gets older?

The Q2 at age 8 is well below the reference at 11.8%, against 23.3% for all vehicles of the same age.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Chart axes: car age, years · failure-rate scale 0–29%.

Takeaway: solid line: this family; dashed: all cars.

How dangerous are Audi Q2 MOT failures?

Major defects are well below the reference at 6.0 per 100 tests, against 52.8 per 100 tests nationally.

higher bar = fails more oftenrate per 100 tests

Chart values: Minor 2.8 · Major 6.0 · Dangerous 4.9.

Per 100 tests on this family. National average: Minor 14.2 · Major 52.8 · Dangerous 11.2 per 100.

Does the month of an Audi Q2 MOT matter?

Oct is highest at 9.2%; Jan is lowest at 8.3% — the gap is 0.9 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Chart scale: 7%–33%.

bars: Audi Q2 · dashed: all class-4 cars

Takeaway: the spread between best and worst month is 0.9 percentage points — booking month barely matters for this family. Seasonality partly reflects registration-date clustering, not weather.

Before reading the shape: most of it is not about cars. Britain changes its registration plates twice a year, and 18.9% of these cars were first registered in March with another17.1% in September — 36% in two months against the 17% an even spread would give. An MOT falls due three years after first registration, so the buying calendar becomes the testing calendar. That shapes how many cars are tested each month — not how often they fail: the busiest months here are not the worst ones, so read the failure line on its own and the volume behind it separately.

Audi Q2 average mileage by age

At age 8, the middle half of Q2s runs from 42,645 miles to 71,398 miles, against 57,118 miles as the median.

further right = more milesmedian is the typical car; band is p25–p75

Chart axes: car age, years · odometer scale 0–75k mi.

Does high mileage mean more Audi Q2 MOT failures at the same age?

Within the same age group, split by odometer (2024 MOTs), so this separates wear from age: at ages 3–5, 7.2% of those with under 40,000 miles failed first time versus 16.8% of those with 100,000–140,000 miles.Inside this age group, higher mileage goes with more failures.

line: median · band: middle half of the fleet (p25–p75)

A typical 8-year-old Q2 has ~57,118 miles on the clock. Much more — ask why; much less — check for gaps in the MOT history.

Where in Britain the Audi Q2 fails its MOT most

Swansea area is highest at 16.2%; Nottingham area is lowest at 3.9% — the gap is 12.3 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Toughest areas	% failing	vs model overall
Swansea (SA)	16.22%	+7.4 pp
Milton Keynes (MK)	12.11%	+3.3 pp
Guildford (GU)	12.08%	+3.3 pp
Exeter (EX)	11.94%	+3.1 pp

Easiest areas	% failing	vs model overall
Nottingham (NG)	3.92%	-4.9 pp
Llandudno (LL)	5.56%	-3.2 pp
Truro (TR)	5.57%	-3.2 pp
Inverness (IV)	5.66%	-3.1 pp
Sutton (SM)	5.76%	-3.0 pp

Why do areas differ?

For each external factor we correlate the area fail rate with the factor across postcode areas that have ≥800 tests of this family, then compare the bottom vs top fifth (quintile) of the factor. Correlation, not causation — factors travel together (the north is colder and often poorer; urban areas are denser and less salted). Road surface condition is joined now, for the 91 English areas the DfT publishes, and it explains nothing: the correlation with suspension failures is −0.01 and with body and structure failures 0.07. Potholes wreck wheels and tyres between tests, but by the time a car reaches the bay the road it drives on leaves no measurable trace.

In areas with the highest mot centre density this model fails 0.3 pp less often than in the lowest fifth (r=-0.10, n=101 areas with ≥800 tests).

In areas with the highest terrain gradient this model fails 0.1 pp less often than in the lowest fifth (r=-0.10, n=60 areas with ≥800 tests).

In areas with the highest urban share this model fails 0.5 pp more often than in the lowest fifth (r=0.08, n=101 areas with ≥800 tests).

Values shown in the quintile chart

Factor	Low Q	High Q	Gap	Correlation
MOT centre density	9.2%	8.9%	-0.3 pp	r=-0.10
Terrain gradient	8.7%	8.6%	-0.1 pp	r=-0.10
Urban share	8.5%	9.1%	+0.6 pp	r=0.08

Factors that only mean something combined

Some conditions are useless on their own and informative multiplied together. Frost days alone say little — Britain barely freezes. Salt tonnage alone says little — it tracks frost. Distance to the sea alone says little. Multiply the first two and divide by the third and you get an index of how hard an area attacks a car's underside, and it lines up with the corrosion defects we actually record. We built five such combinations and tested each against our own data. Three survived; two did not, and the failures are listed here on purpose — a proxy that was never checked is decoration. One survivor only survived on the second attempt: built from a crude stand-in for street parking it failed outright, and rebuilt from the census — terraced streets carrying more cars than they have driveways — it works, and carries information the salt index does not.

Composite area indicators, each tested against a defect rate we measure

Composite	Built from	Tested against	r	Verdict
Underbody corrosion	frost days × salt load ÷ (distance to coast + 1)	share of tests with a corrosion defect	+0.42	holds (116 areas)
Tyre wear	rain days × annual miles ÷ age at first tyre advisory	share of tests failing on tyres	+0.45	holds (116 areas)
Overnight corrosion	terraced housing × cars per household × frost days	share with a corrosion defect	+0.41	holds (102 areas) — and adds signal beyond the first index
Deferred maintenance	deprivation × advisory-to-failure conversion ÷ labour rate	cars repeating the same advisory	−0.26	fails (118 areas)
Powertrain stress	engine capacity ÷ kerb weight	suspension, brake and emissions failures	−0.16	fails (22 models)

The deprivation result is the one worth dwelling on. The intuition that poorer areas defer repairs is strong enough that most people treat it as established. We tested it twice — once on raw failure rates (r = 0.04) and again, more fairly, on whether an advisory turns into a failure — and it did not hold any of the three times we tried it — on raw failure rates, on advisory-to-failure conversion, and again with deprivation measured properly inside each nation rather than England alone. We are closing it. What does predict local failure rates is the density of test centres, which is a statement about testing, not about cars.

All external-factor correlations (machine-readable)

Factor	r	n areas	Low-Q fail %	High-Q fail %	Gap pp	Low-Q factor	High-Q factor
MOT centre density (per 10k vehicles)	-0.102	101	9.2	8.9	-0.3	5	8.4
Terrain gradient (% grade)	-0.096	60	8.7	8.6	-0.1	0.5	3.5
Urban share (0–1)	0.081	101	8.5	9.1	+0.5	0.4	1
Distance to coast (km)	0.069	101	8.9	8.9	+0.0	6.3	79.6
Income deprivation (score)	-0.044	86	8.7	8.8	+0.1	0.1	0.2
Road-salt proxy (g/m²-yr)	-0.011	101	8.6	8.5	-0.1	220.7	677.2
Frost days (days/year)	0.000	101	8.9	8.6	-0.3	11.5	38.2

Deprivation uses England IMD 2019 income score only (Scotland SIMD is a different scale). Salt proxy is a simplified NWSRG-style dry-salt sum from air Tmin; coastalness is distance from the area centroid to the nearest coastline.

Every dot is a postcode area — size = how many were tested there, colour = share failing. These figures are not age-adjusted: coastal and rural areas often run older fleets and salted roads, so higher raw fail rates do not automatically mean a worse local stock of this model.

Map labels: Scotland · N. England · Wales · London · S. West. Colour scale: 6%–11% failing.

Audi Q2 survival: which cars are still on the road

By age 8 is well below the reference at 1.6%, against 100.0% at the ages 4–6 reference level.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Chart axes: car age, years · survival vs ages 4–6 · scale 0–105%.

By age 8, only about 2% as many cars of this family present for MOT as at ages 4–6 (reference n≈43,320); survivors still fail at 11.8% vs 8.4% at age 4. Older cars that still appear are a selected subset — weaker ones have already left.

How many miles does an Audi Q2 last?

100,000+ miles stands out at 0.4%.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Of 220,721 tests of this family with a usable odometer in 2024, 0.4% had reached 100k miles. This is a cross-section of cars still presenting for MOT, not a full birth cohort.

How many years is an Audi Q2 likely to last?

Bought at age 5 is highest at 1.4 years; Bought at age 8 is lowest at 0.5 years — the gap is 0.9 years.

bigger number = longer remaining lifeyears on the observed survival curve

estimateObserved only until age 8. The curve does not run five years past the stated age with the share still tested under 50%, so no 'years left' number is given.

Audi Q2 faults that come together

Body & structure + Lamps & electrical stand out at 14.27×, against 1.00× if the faults were independent.

above 1.0× = more than expectedbelow 1.0× = less

Defects in «Brakes» and «Tyres» appear together 4.76× more often than chance (684 co-occurrences in the same test; lift≥1.3, n≥500).

Lift = how many times more often both groups appear on the same test than if independent. A pair is listed from 5 tests with both faults; the lift is shown from 20, and called above chance only when its 95% interval excludes 1 (see rough estimates).

Is low mileage better for an Audi Q2?

Cars driven under 5,000 miles a year is well below the reference at 6.5%, against 12.7% for cars driven 8,000–12,000 miles a year.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

At matched ages 5–14, cars averaging under 5k miles/year fail at 6.5% vs 12.7% for 8–12k miles/year — 6.2 pp lower (n_low=18,852, n_normal=24,603). In this family low annual use is associated with fewer MOT fails, not more — the ‘garage queen’ penalty is not visible in overall fail rates. Diesel alone: 7.8% low-use vs 12.9% normal (-5.0 pp).

Which Audi Q2 engine is best?

diesel 1.5–1.8 is highest at 126.0; petrol 1.2–1.5 is lowest at 85.9 — the gap is 40.1 points.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

Splitting this model by fuel alone hides the thing that actually differs. Within the same badge, the diesel 1.5–1.8 runs at 126 against this model's own age norm while the petrol 1.2–1.5 runs at 85.9 — a spread of 40.1 points between two cars that share a name.

Read this one with more care than the rest of the page. Age is held constant, but who buys which engine is not: the largest capacity in a range is often a performance or executive variant that is garaged, cherished and lightly driven, while the smallest is frequently a fleet or entry car worked hard from new. The gap below is real in the test records; how much of it is the engine and how much is the owner, this data cannot separate. Bands under 100 tests are not shown; bands under 5,000 tests are rough estimates.

Best year for an Audi Q2, and the years to avoid

Build year 2020 is highest at 115.6; Build year 2016 is lowest at 92.0 — the gap is 23.6 points.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

build year vs the same model at the same age · 100 = as expected

The best build year here is 2017 and the weakest is 2020. Comparing build years sounds simple and is not: within a single year of testing, a car's build year and its age are the same number, so a naive comparison of years is a comparison of ages wearing a disguise. Each year below is measured against the same model at the same age in other cohorts, across six years of testing — 3 of 5 years come out distinguishable from their own model's age norm.

Two limits worth knowing before you act on this. Age, test year and build year are locked together by arithmetic, so the test-year effect is taken from the observed national failure level of each year rather than estimated — it is an adjustment, not a solution.

Audi Q2 MOT repair costs

The MOT-failure repair budget per test runs from £10.79 to £20.50, against £54.85 for the test itself.

bigger number = costs morepounds per test, MOT-failing faults only

Multiply how often each component fails on this model by what that repair usually costs, and you get the amount an owner should expect to budget per test for MOT-failing faults only — roughly £11 to £21, on top of the test fee itself. It is a budgeting figure, not a quote: the spread between a set of pads and a set of discs is most of the range.

Prices are modal quotes from a hand-kept catalogue of published UK garage guides — we do not scrape the booking sites, their terms forbid it, so this list is short and updated by hand with a source and date against each line. Each line prices one typical repair in that group, not a full remedy, and only groups our catalogue actually covers are counted. The contrast worth noticing is the second card: the legal maximum for the test has been £54.85 since 2010, while the repairs it uncovers have followed inflation the whole time.

For scale from a different direction: Warrantywise, which sees used-car warranty claims rather than test failures, puts the average claim at £2,052 across the ten highest-claim models it ranks and £539 for Honda, the lowest-claim make in its index (Warrantywise index 2026, 1.6 million claims, cars aged 3–15). Those sit an order of magnitude above the figures in this table, and the gap is the point: a warranty claim is a gearbox or an engine, which almost never fails an MOT, while the faults that do fail one are corrosion, lamps and tyres, which no warranty pays for. The two numbers answer different questions and neither replaces the other.

Audi Q2 running costs for a fleet

Vehicles failing at age 8 stand out at 12.0%, against 10.0% at age 5, tested in the same year.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

No single year stands out as the point where this model starts costing more: the year-to-year steps in its failure rate are too small or rest on too few tests to name one (D1 rule: a step is named only with at least 2,000 tests on both sides and a jump above 3 percentage points).

Repair spend uses the same modal prices as the section above, so it inherits the same limits: one typical repair per component group, not a full remedy. Downtime is the gap between the failed test and the passed re-test, which is the window a vehicle is legally off the road.

Audi Q2 rust problems: where they corrode

Age-standardised corrosion susceptibility is well below the reference at <0.1×, against 1.00× for the national age-standardised rate.

above 1.0× = rusts more than averagebelow 1.0× = rusts less

This Audi Q2 virtually never fails on corrosion once age is held constant, and its owners live in areas that are saltier than most for the models we publish. Both point the same way and reinforce each other: it resists corrosion even though its owners live in saltier areas than most.

Corrosion is the one failure mode that is as much about geography as about the car. We keep the two apart on purpose: a model can look rusty simply because it is popular in Scotland, and a model can look clean simply because it is bought in Surrey. Blending them into a single score would hide which of the two is doing the work.

Exposure is this model's tests weighted by an area corrosion index built from frost days, salt load and distance to the coast — the composite validated at r = 0.42 against corrosion defects we actually record. It is published as a rank, not a raw score, because every mainstream model skews towards low-corrosion areas for the simple reason that most of Britain's cars are in the south. Susceptibility is standardised to the national age profile, so an old fleet does not get labelled a rusty model.

Does an Audi Q2 advisory become a failure?

Tyres are highest at 5.9%; Non-component advisories are lowest at 0.0% — the gap is 5.9 percentage points.

higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability

chance the same component fails at the next MOT, given an advisory now

This is the question an advisory note actually raises, and it needs six years of test history to answer. We followed the same vehicles from one MOT to the next across 2019–2024 and measured how often a component that was merely advised came back as a genuine failure at the next test.

Read it as a budgeting horizon, not a prophecy: the most likely component above turns into a failure for about 6 in 100 cars, and the median gap is 12 months and roughly 7,590 miles. The rest were repaired, sold, scrapped, or simply held. Rows with fewer than 500 tracked advisories are not shown.

What will fail next on an Audi Q2?

Tyres after a failure at age 3-5 are highest at 5.7%; Brakes after a passed at age <3 are lowest at 0.9% — the gap is 4.8 percentage points.

higher = more likelypercentage is the observed transition probability

The same chains, cut differently: given a car's age and how its last test went, which component most often causes trouble at the following one.

The pattern that repeats across every family: a failure at one test roughly doubles the chance of a failure on the same component at the next one, and an advisory sits about half-way between a clean pass and a failure. Age bands in years; probabilities are per car, not per defect item.

Audi Q2 ownership: what six years of MOTs show

The ten-day re-test pass rate is highest at 49.2%; The later re-test pass rate is lowest at 1.9% — the gap is 47.3 percentage points.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

Failing is usually a same-week event, not a disaster. Of 14,661 failures followed through to their re-test, 48.86% were repaired and passed the same day and 49.24% within ten days; the median gap is 1 day. 22,775 defect items were cleared in the process.

Per mile driven, not per year. Dividing failures by the miles that actually went onto the odometers between consecutive tests gives 0.132 failures per 10,000 miles, on a median of 6,642 miles a year across 58,837 chains. This is the number to compare between models — an annual rate quietly rewards cars that barely leave the drive.

Two populations hide inside one model. 37.99% of these cars strung together three or more tests with nothing recorded at all, while 10.02% carried the same advisory three times or more — the same fault, noted, ignored, noted again. When you buy used you are buying one of those two histories, and the MOT record shows which.

Odometer anomalies: 0.291% of 58,858 chains show a reading lower than the previous test, with a median drop of 7,822 miles. We call this an anomaly and not fraud on purpose — instrument swaps, imports, unit mix-ups and keying errors all land in the same bucket. Obvious typos (drops under 100 miles or over 90% of the reading) are already excluded.

Audi Q2 safety recalls and how to check yours

DVSA recall campaigns stand out at 5.

bigger number = more recorded casescompare like-for-like scope, not sample size alone

recall campaigns launched per year

DVSA lists 5 safety recall campaigns for the Audi Q2, covering roughly 107,990 vehicles in total. A recall is the manufacturer fixing a fault for free, so an open recall on your car costs nothing to clear.

Counter-intuitive, and measured on our own data: across the 25 families published here, more recalls go with a lower MOT Risk Index (r = −0.52). Heavily recalled models are not worse cars in the test bay — an active manufacturer removes the fault before it becomes an MOT failure.

Check whether a specific car has an outstanding recall — free, by registration — at DVSA's recall service. Source: DVSA vehicle safety recalls (check-vehicle-recalls.service.gov.uk), OGL.

Audi Q2 inspection results in other countries

Netherlands APK is well below the reference at 25.1%, against 50.8% nationally.

higher = larger sharecompare shares in percentage points

The verdict is consistent across every regime where the difference is clear, which is the strongest form this comparison takes: independent inspectorates, different rulebooks, same direction of travel.

Worth dwelling on how mundane the top of that list is: tyre pressure, tread depth, headlight aim. The Dutch APK records 0.525 defects per inspection against a much higher national failure rate than Britain's, and the reason is not that Dutch cars are worse — it is that the two regimes draw the line between "note it" and "fail it" in different places. Codes are the RDW's own; the English wording here is our translation of the Dutch original.

Britain is not the only country that inspects every car every year, and the Audi Q2 is on the road in all of them. Each national regime writes its own rules, so the pass rates below are not comparable to each other — what does travel across a border is whether a model sits above or below its own country's average.

Rows with fewer than 500 inspections are not published. Sources: RDW open data — Meldingen Keuringsinstantie + Geconstateerde Gebreken + Gekentekende voertuigen (2024), CC0. Not an RDW endorsement.; Traficom — Periodic inspections of cars by model / by model and fault object 2024, CC BY 4.0; Statens vegvesen — Periodisk kjøretøykontroll (PKK) 2024, CC BY 4.0. Adapted; licences and full notice.

Audi Q2 MOT: quick answers

Audi Q2 MOT Risk Index is well below the reference at 62.4, against 100 for a car with the same age profile.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

What is the Audi Q2 first-time MOT pass rate?

90.32% of first attempts passed in 2024 (73,559 tests). This is the first-time figure: retests after repair are excluded. Basis: first-time, excluding retests.

Why does this number differ from other sites?

Other sites often report a pass rate that includes retests or counts all attempts. Our 9.68% figure is the first-time initial failure rate, using 73,559 primary tests as the denominator (first-time, excluding retests). The age-adjusted MOT initial-failure ratio 62.4 is shown separately because raw rates compare fleet age as well as cars.

Compare the Audi Q2 with other cars

MINI Countryman is highest at 69.3; Jaguar I-Pace is lowest at 59.1 — the gap is 10.2 points.

below 100 is betterabove 100 is worse100 = normal for this model at that age

Same brand

All Audi MOT statisticsAudi Q5 MOT statsAudi A6 MOT stats

Similar risk

Volkswagen T-Roc (index 62.4)Jaguar I-Pace (index 59.1)MINI Countryman (index 69.3)

Same size class

how Nissan Navara compareshow Volvo XC40 compareshow Toyota Hilux compares

By build year

Audi Q2 2016Audi Q2 2017Audi Q2 2018Audi Q2 2019Audi Q2 2020

By area

Audi Q2 MOT failure rate by postcode area

By failure group

Audi Q2 body, chassis and structure failuresAudi Q2 brakes failuresAudi Q2 vehicle identification failuresAudi Q2 lamps, reflectors and electrics failuresAudi Q2 noise, emissions and leaks failuresAudi Q2 road wheels failuresAudi Q2 seat belts and airbags failuresAudi Q2 steering failuresAudi Q2 suspension failuresAudi Q2 tyres failuresAudi Q2 visibility failures

Inspections abroad

Audi Q2 in NorwayAudi Q2 in FinlandAudi Q2 in the Netherlands